As a Mac guy I get the sense of the idea Microsoft has with this and I like what they think they want to do, but the execution of how to get there... ugh.

It took me about 10 seconds to find Desktop, it took me another 10 seconds to discover that they've removed Control Panel and everything else useful from Desktop. 5 minutes later I found out how to turn on the "Administration Tiles" on the main Metro screen

The scrolling is phone-like, the icons are terrible, the menus are too sparse, it's just too disjointed.

I went to uninstall Norton so I could turn Windows Defender on (the renamed MSE), but I couldn't find Windows Defender anywhere. I found the Search Charm, typed in Windows Defender, first result came up, clicked it, error message telling me that something else was already the default antivirus and I needed to go disable that first in the Security Center. Of course Windows didn't offer to link me to the Security Center, I had to spend another 5 minutes figuring out how to dig that up.

It feels like everything I really need is intentionally buried behind 5 layers of searching crap, while the crap I don't need has gigantic animated tiles for quick access. It's like running MS-DOS and not being able to type "dir".

Don't worry. Shortly an officially santioned Microsoft White Knight will be here to assure us all of how stupid we all are for disliking the metro interface because the desktop still exists and you can pull up a stunted version of the control panel and administrative tools by moving your mouse to the corner of the screen and right-clicking the invisible, poorly-documented button for it.

/ that said, getting your tech news from The Register is about as bright as getting your political news from Fox News Channel....// if you must use Windows 8, learn all the .msc files, a couple useful Powershell commands and all the keyboard shortcuts/// then you can be almost as productive as you were on Windows 7, and for only the small cost of an upgrade!

FTFA:Microsoft did say that the figure of 60 million could be attributed to upgrades and sales to manufacturers - so not sales of actual PCs to the end user.

I suspect the breakdown is something like this:00.1% - people actually buying Windows 8 by itself, to upgrade from something else.24.9% - people buying new machines and having no choice but Windows 8.75.0% - "sold" to distributors/retailers, so now it's their problem, not ours.

It was $40 and I had XP.

I thought about getting it for my wife's XP machine, but I like being married to her.

BullBearMS:RDixon: I wonder how many buyers of new PCs, blindsided by Windows 8 and having to relearn simple tasks, have returned the PCs for replacement with Windows 7 machines.

One of the vendors of high end gaming rigs at CES said that they offer their gaming rigs with either Windows 7 or 8 and that half of those who pick Windows 8 want to return it and get Windows 7.

People complained when Windows 95 came out.People complained when Windows NT came out.People complained when Windows 2000 came out.People complained when Windows XP came out.People complained when Windows 7 came out.

So see, even if they release truly good OSs, people still complain. I can't believe the number of goofs that still run XP.

Trayal:xria: I think the idea is to try and force all new apps to be Modern UI so the same app works on Windows, Tablet, Mobile without having to build different versions of an app for each one, whereas if they made it a feature people would mostly keep making desktop apps, which would mean the tablet/mobile app "ecosystem" wouldn't build as fast.

This is small part of the picture, but to my mind not the complete picture. The real reason is that they see how much money apple is making in their walled garden, and want a piece of the action - that is, getting a cut of every app sold for the platform. So, while having a common platform across devices could be a nice side benefit, I highly doubt it is the real reason for forcing the "Modern UI" on everybody. The real reason would thus be the walled garden. Why else would they hamstring the old UI that everybody is comfortable and happy with? They think their market position is strong enough to force everybody into a new paradigm to their own benefit.

I suppose that makes sense but "walled garden" doesn't really apply to the desktop, on either Windows or OS X.

I mean, c'mon. I'm not the brightest guy here by a long shot and even I figured Metro out and adapted to it.

You have to remember though that fark had a near apocalyptic meltdown over the 'smart' and 'Funny' buttons and every other site redesign, no matter how minor, since the beginning of fark. The majority of us are repulsed by the mere thought of a stranger clipping their fingernails in their cubical. The smell of microwaved food of any nationality is sure to offend some portion of farkers if they happen to be working in the same building. These people do no handle adversity very well.

1) So you can adjust the color of windows borders... but you can't adjust the color of window border text. Want a dark color? Well you won't be able to read the black text in the window border.2) Why can't I natively create tiles for the start screen? Seriously. Just create a new square, pick an image, and choose a program from a list. Nope, gotta be one of a few apps and even then you can't customize the tile. You have to use a 3rd party program to help you do this. It's just shortcuts on a screen. Seriously, Packard Bell used something similar back in the 386 days and they gave you actual customizations to work with.

And in classic MS form they don't let you pick the background you want for something without a registry hack, this time it's the start screen. Why is dropping a user selected image into the background such a hard thing. Gotta be one of 8 presets. I guess they do that to preserve resources on a cellphone, but I'm using a desktop. They really should have made a "separate but equal" OS for both a desktop and a cellphone.

Just a few nits that make me scratch my head. The two I mentioned above were literally the first two things I tried after moving to Windows 8. How did that get past any usability test... or was all testing performed on phones?

Eh, they didn't let you change the background of the start menu without editing a dll in xp, not sure about vista/7. A registry key is a step up but yeah, seems like something people would want.

You can create tiles for the start screen. If you want them to be live tiles and do things, then you'll need to actually make an app. But if you just want a shortcut, then just search for whatever program you want and right click it and select pin-to-start. The list of tiles they give you is just the contents of the old start menu. If you right click a tile and select "open file location" it'll bring up the shortcut's location (probably C:\Users\\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs). You can edit the shortcut to do whatever you want and have whatever icon you want and the tile will do that.

pheelix:netweavr: Eh? It feels nicer than XP. Kinda pleased with the change.

But how is it compared to 7?

At least for me it works fine. I don't use the metro screen for much yet, mostly just playing around with it. But besides that not much different. It's seems to be quite stable and fast. I know I'm in the minority here but I've had no real issues or problems. It does take a few days to figure out the new stuff. But most of that is just minor. Really if you have a desktop you don't need to upgrade. I did because it was $40, and i got a windows phone so i wanted to how they would interact. But given the chance I would not go back either. But like I said i guess I'm in the minority.

Before you laugh, the price jumps to $199 February 1st. That's right! If you don't like it at $40, you'll don't like it more at $200! Historically, $40 for a full legal copy of Windows (x) Professional is a steal. I don't like the Metro UI either, but install one of the Start Menu fixes (I use Stardock Start8 for $5) and you'll almost never deal with Metro.

FTFA:Microsoft did say that the figure of 60 million could be attributed to upgrades and sales to manufacturers - so not sales of actual PCs to the end user.

I suspect the breakdown is something like this:00.1% - people actually buying Windows 8 by itself, to upgrade from something else.24.9% - people buying new machines and having no choice but Windows 8.75.0% - "sold" to distributors/retailers, so now it's their problem, not ours.

So? Why do I care how many licenses are available to the likes of Dell and Acer and Lenovo? Got a relevant number like how many copies are actually in the hands of end users or just inconsequential bullshiat about how many available licenses are sitting around in hardware manufacturer databases?

ampoliros:That number counts the licenses sold to manufactures to put onto new products. The number that were actually sold to end users has nothing to do with that.

Nor does it track people who buy OEM Windows 8 machines and downgrade them to Windows 7.

doczoidberg:Now is the time for some competing operating system to start getting ready to take MS down.

And just like the Vista days, we have the ideal time when Apple should release their OS to Dell, HP, Asus, Lenovo, Sony, Toshiba, and Acer. They wouldn't get much of the commercial market, but would easily get 25-50% of home PC buyers to order OSX instead of Windows 8.

But they won't. I swear, it's like they want money - just not all of it.

error 303:It's awesome on tablets but junk on desktops. Desktop option is fine, seems a little faster to me actually, but it's dumb that it's not the default. Metro or whatever should be a feature, not the whole thing.

I think the idea is to try and force all new apps to be Modern UI so the same app works on Windows, Tablet, Mobile without having to build different versions of an app for each one, whereas if they made it a feature people would mostly keep making desktop apps, which would mean the tablet/mobile app "ecosystem" wouldn't build as fast. So basically they are trying to leverage their perceived bulletproof dominance of the desktop market to boost their chances of being successful in the tablet and mobile realms, thinking that there is little risk of losing desktop users to Mac/Linux no matter how much annoyance and confusion trying to fasttrack the switch.

It's awesome on tablets but junk on desktops. Desktop option is fine, seems a little faster to me actually, but it's dumb that it's not the default. Metro or whatever should be a feature, not the whole thing.

Hardware manufacturers DID come late to the game. They're pushing a TON of new convertibles and tablets this year at CES, but so long after the Win8 launch I can see where MS is peeved. Nothing they can really do about it, mind you. Deal with it.